The battle to protect the health of citizens now seems to take on the contours of a neo-prohibitionism. Unlike the historic ban on alcohol that took place in the United States during the 30s, which prohibited the manufacture, sale, importation and transport of alcohol, the current attitude taken by many governments towards of smoking, "junk" food and alcohol itself appears less coercive but equally harsh and, fundamentally, devoid of positive feedback.
If one thinks of the contrast of the so-called “junk foodIt's worth remembering that in 2011, the city of San Francisco banned chains fast food to give away toys in children's menus, unless the meal met specific nutritional criteria. Well, the results published by the University of Stanford have shown that, however, to date, no children's menu has been modified to meet the criteria indicated but on the other hand the toys, instead of being given away, have been sold for 10 cents. (to circumvent the ban), and 88% of parents bought them together with the menu, making the efforts made by the Administration in the fight against juvenile obesity practically in vain.
Equally unsuccessful was the attempt to ban carbonated drinks in glasses of more than 470 ml imposed by the mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg in 2012. The law imposing the ban was declared unconstitutional by the Court of Appeals since it was dictated by political reasons and economic rather than being inspired by the real intent to protect the health of citizens. A similar provision was also proposed in our house in 2011 when the Regional Assembly of Sicily voted to ban sugary carbonated drinks from all schools on the island.
And together with junk food, sodas, sugars, tobacco has been at the top of the list for many years. As regards the fight against smoking, in recent times the most incisive arrows have been thrown by the countries of British culture. In Australia, since December 2012, the Supreme Court has given the green light to the law imposing the so-called "plain packaging” or neutral packaging, i.e. no-logo. Basically, to fight tobacco addiction more effectively, the Australian authorities have decided to sell cigarettes only in anonymous packets, all olive green in colour, with 85% of the surface occupied by images shock on the effects of smoking and, above all, without any reference to the brands of the producers. The results in this area too have been extremely disappointing: according to some estimates it seems that young Australian smokers aged between 12 and 17 have even increased, going from 2,5 to 3,4 per cent in the three-year period 2010-2013.
In addition to this, this anti-smoking policy has caused an increase in the phenomenon of counterfeiting of tobacco products and has dramatically increased the phenomenon of smuggling: from 2012 to 2013 illicit products in the Australian tobacco market increased from 11,8 to 13,3, 700 percent and, in the same period, the government lost more than a billion Australian dollars (about XNUMX million euros) in lost revenues (source KPMG).
Here too, in Italy, the problem of smuggling is not negligible, even without anonymous packets of cigarettes. At the end of 2011, cigarette smuggling in our country reached its peak: 11,8% of the market. And it was the Treasury that paid the consequences, just think that between VAT and excise duties, literally hundreds of millions of euros go up in smoke every year.
But returning to the Anglo-Saxon countries, Great Britain and Ireland also seem to want to follow the path traced by Australia. If the legislative process undertaken is successful, it will soon be possible to market cigarettes only in "neutral" packaging where, instead of the famous logos, impressive images of diseases linked to smoking will be printed. Today in Great Britain at least 20 percent of adults are unable to give up smoking and every year at least 200 young people aged between 11 and 15 start using tobacco. At the forefront against smoking there is also Ireland, which started the project some time ago FreeIreland, to free the country from cigarettes by 2015, which provides for the approval of the packs as, it says, "standardized packaging reduces misconceptions about the risks of smoking, increases the effectiveness of health warnings, reduces the attractiveness to consume among youth and young adults, and may promote smoking cessation among regular smokers".
However, ten member countries (including Italy) that have rejected the two initiatives, let's see what happens. Meanwhile, the poor results that can be expected from this type of operation are underlined by many, not least by the tobacco multinationals: "There is no evidence or scientific research to suggest that young people start smoking because they are attracted by the brand logo and the colors printed on the packs”explains the head of institutional relations of Imperial Tobacco Italia Valerio Forconi. Obviously nobody denies the health risks, in question, if anything, is the deterrent effectiveness of the new neutral packaging. It is therefore perhaps worth reflecting and intervening on the cultural approach to these products instead of imposing strict rules which, in the end, prove (and have proved in the past) ineffective and counterproductive, even for those who should be protected by them : the citizens.
